"With John Prescott’s decision possibly only days away..."

[balloonboy]

Quote from FFA press release dated 8th March. It all seems to have gone suspiciously quiet since early Monday. What is going on? Does anyone have any inside info on when the decision is likely to be?

 

[berkshire seagull]

Got a feeling its very very soon

 

[Virgo's Haircut]

I've been hearing the "days away" thing for a few weeks now, so I wouldn't read too much into it.

But hopefully I'm wrong and a big "YES" will be heard from the wonderful Deputy PM!

 

[balloonboy]

I've been hearing the "days away" thing for a few weeks now, so I wouldn't read too mucg into it.

Yes, but sooner or later it's going to be true!

 

[Titanic]

I think the clue is in the word 'possibly'

 

[Storer68]

I rang my mate up at the ODPM asked when the decision was due.

She said she'd never heard of it and didn't know.































But then she does work in the Fire Services directorate

 

[Simster]

Got a feeling its very very soon

Yes and thanks for all your hard work.

 

[berkshire seagull]

Yes and thanks for all your hard work.

You being sarcastic are ya.
Done my bit son i.e letters etc and a fair few from many others i no,so cut the crap out as your like most on here.

You think im the only one on here who didn't hand leaflets out etc,well your very wrong.

 

[chips and gravy]

The only decision he will be making in the next few days is what to put on his shopping list for next week.

Hmm shall I have lard or dripping? Puff or shortcrust pastry on my pie?

 

[perseus]

The decision will NOT be made before the end of this season, including the play-offs.

Will it be made before the start of next season? This is doubtful as well.

It is a long haul game.

 

[berkshire seagull]

The decision will NOT be made before the end of this season, including the play-offs.

Will it be made before the start of next season? This is doubtful as well.

It is a long haul game.

Considering its all a mystery when, how on earth would you know that then as can't see it going that far.

Nobody has any idea but you it seems

 

[Lammy]

What decision? It's been so long I've forgotten what it's all about! I know we're waiting for a decision from Precott about something but I can't remember what?

 

[Mr C]

I am sure I remember someone saying that the "decision possibly days away" wording in the FFA press release was not to be taken literally, but was merely used to inject some sense of urgency into the situation. That is all.

 

[perseus]

Cause that's how long it normally takes. Eleven months from the end of the Public Inquiry seems the average/earliest time. And this could be June at the earliest, but because of the supplementary Inquiry it could be much longer.

 

[berkshire seagull]

Take your word for that and no doubt it will go the distance as its bha.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Cause that's how long it normally takes. Eleven months from the end of the Public Inquiry seems the average/earliest time. And this could be June at the earliest, but because of the supplementary Inquiry it could be much longer.

It depends on what he's got to work with.

1. If he has an Inspector's Report that recommends "NO", it's the easiest thing in the world for Prescott to issue a decision that says "NO, for the reasons set out in the Inspector's Report".

2. If the Inspector recommends "NO" and Prescott wants to say "YES", then Prescott has to make sure that his reasons are fully explained. He'll also want to get his lawyers to look at it, to ensure that he doesn't leave scope for his decision being challenged in the Courts. That can take an age.

3. If the Inspector recommends "YES", and Prescott wants to say "NO", the same thing applies.

4. If the Inspector recommends "YES, but with conditions" and Prescott wants to say "YES", then the lawyers need to be satisfied that the conditions are reasonable. That takes time as well.

The longer this drags on, the less likely it is that (1) is going to be the outcome. It has already been acknowledged by Planning Minister, Keith Hill, that post-Inquiry representations will be taken into account. That justifies our current campaign.


PS I have no idea what Percy means by the "supplementary Inquiry". Did we miss something?

 

[Icy Gull]

As soon as I read Perseus' comment I just knew he'd be "put right" by LB within a couple of hours this is a regular occurence, how long have you two known each other?

 

[Simster]

Indeed Icy. It works well. Perseus puts forward his "theory", which Lord Bracknell feels compelled to adjust and in doing so gives us all the facts we could possibly need.

Marvellous scenes.

 

[Lammy]

Although LB has missed off:

5) Delaying decision for political reasons. i.e. out of season to avoid trouble. Hinder chances of us sorting out our own party etc... or for some other shady reason.

 

[perseus]

What little information is available suggests that Prescott does not care a damn about the political connotation of his decisions, or his actions.

There seems plenty of examples where he comes to the complete opposite decision to that of the Planning Inspector as well.

What does seem more consistent is that he abides by the planning policy decisions thought up by Millbank. i.e. the transport policy may well be a big plus point.

I would go for the "strength of the argument" with a few well thought out letters on the merits of Falmer rather than sheer numbers. But that is a policy decision of FFA. I would like to think that we could get more of the neutrals on our side, not really to influence Prescott as much as to get more goodwill when Falmer is eventually built.

The supplementary bit was when the Public Inquiry was reconvened for the extra information in October. I can't remember the exact date when the first Public Inquiry ended, but was that May 2003? Eleven months after that or eleven months after the extra information was put before the Inspector? Any time from April 2004 to September 2004 seems the best odds I could find.

I would go for a YES on 26 September 2004 being optimistic.